3 ms·

The FCC has dragged their scapegoat into the public square to torture in a big show for the brutalized masses. But how effective has the FCC been at actually c

The FCC has dragged their scapegoat into the public square to torture in a big show for the brutalized masses. But how effective has the FCC been at actually curtailing the problem of robocalls? This FCC won't do anything meaningful because they've been bought off by the telecoms, and the telecoms make money hand over fist on robocalls: http://www.latimes.com/business/lazarus/la-fi-lazarus-fcc-robocalls-20160729-snap-story.html http://www.latimes.com/business/lazarus/la-fi-lazarus-fcc-ro... "The problem," he said, "is that for the carriers, it's a conflict of interest. All of these robocallers represent billable minutes. From a revenue standpoint, anything they do to crack down represents a reduction of billable traffic on their networks." Same way this FCC's purported "deregulation" of net neutrality is a sham which rigs the game so that the telecoms can leverage their market dominance in more verticals. We know what the technical solutions are for the problem of robocalls. Corruption and legalized bribery are preventing the application of those technical solutions.

rayiner 9y ago
Do you have a source that’s not an offhand quote suggesting that carriers make any significant revenue from robo calls? Also, most robo calls are made through VoIP services. Aren’t they the one with the most financial incentive to keep robocalls going, and the ones that could most easily detect them? By the time the robocall gets to a carrier’s network, its already been mixed with tons of legitimate traffic from VoIP users.
- Rjevski 9y ago
  I work in telecoms. The billable minutes thing is absolutely true. You might not directly pay for them as a customer, but carriers pay each other for inbound calls, so whatever carrier that is originating the robocalls is paying the next carrier in the chain, and that one pays the next, and so on until it finally reaches your phone. We’re not talking much on a single call (the prices are often around 0,01$ or even less) but when you take all the robocalls originated in a single day that adds up to quite a bit.
  - rayiner 9y ago
    The inter exchange fees are a way to divvy up the revenue collected at the call originator. At the end of the day, the total amount of revenues once all those payments are netted out is going to be limited by how much the robocaller companies are paying for phone service. Is there any evidence that is a lot of money that creates incentives for corruption, as OP implies?
  - wpietri 9y ago
    I believe that for some carriers the billable minutes thing is significant. But what I'm really skeptical of is rectang's assertion that the FCC has been bought off by the same carriers for whom this is significant revenue. I certainly believe that the FCC is too influenced by large telcoms companies. As we see with the Michael Cohen thing, large companies believe they can buy influence. But those same companies that are receiving the calls are mainly paid by consumers. Is TMobile really willing to risk losing my ~$100/month to get whatever they do for calls I don't answer? I'm sure there are carriers for whom the robocalls are a major slice of revenue. But are any of them nearly as big as the consumer-focused telecoms companies?
    - Rjevski 9y ago
      It’s not really been bought off by those exact carriers, but by the telco industry as a whole. The industry is honestly shady as fuck. They’re being pushed into irrelevance by the internet and VoIP (where there’s no such thing as paying for minutes, thankfully), have thousands of employees to pay (despite not doing much, as they became irrelevant over time), and so while incoming call revenue is maybe 1% of total revenue for someone like T-Mobile, it’s still paying for some useless people’s pay checks, so of course those are gonna fight back. Now aggregate that across the entire industry - everyone fighting for their 1% of total revenue - and you’ve still got a strong pushback. Finally your carrier knows they’re not going to loose your 100$/month over robocalls because you have nowhere to go. The situation might change if one carrier bites the bullet and implements a working solution (but good luck given that it requires industry-wide cooperation), then the other carriers will wake up as they now know customers actually have a competitor to go to.
lioeters 9y ago
Regulatory capture ("corruption and legalized bribery" in other words) is the critical point that should be raised in every discussion regarding FCC. Without addressing this formative power dynamic, there can be no meaningful progress.
kevin_b_er 9y ago
This is because Ajit Pai, along with his party, value corporate profit above service to the public.
vertexFarm 9y ago
Damn, good point. I figured this should be an easily solvable problem. Stands to reason that the FCC is just letting it happen because they're hilariously corrupt. Definitely one of the most successfully captured regulatory bodies.

rayiner 9y ago

Do you have a source that’s not an offhand quote suggesting that carriers make any significant revenue from robo calls? Also, most robo calls are made through VoIP services. Aren’t they the one with the most financial incentive to keep robocalls going, and the ones that could most easily detect them? By the time the robocall gets to a carrier’s network, its already been mixed with tons of legitimate traffic from VoIP users.

Rjevski 9y ago
I work in telecoms. The billable minutes thing is absolutely true. You might not directly pay for them as a customer, but carriers pay each other for inbound calls, so whatever carrier that is originating the robocalls is paying the next carrier in the chain, and that one pays the next, and so on until it finally reaches your phone. We’re not talking much on a single call (the prices are often around 0,01$ or even less) but when you take all the robocalls originated in a single day that adds up to quite a bit.
- rayiner 9y ago
  The inter exchange fees are a way to divvy up the revenue collected at the call originator. At the end of the day, the total amount of revenues once all those payments are netted out is going to be limited by how much the robocaller companies are paying for phone service. Is there any evidence that is a lot of money that creates incentives for corruption, as OP implies?
- wpietri 9y ago
  I believe that for some carriers the billable minutes thing is significant. But what I'm really skeptical of is rectang's assertion that the FCC has been bought off by the same carriers for whom this is significant revenue. I certainly believe that the FCC is too influenced by large telcoms companies. As we see with the Michael Cohen thing, large companies believe they can buy influence. But those same companies that are receiving the calls are mainly paid by consumers. Is TMobile really willing to risk losing my ~$100/month to get whatever they do for calls I don't answer? I'm sure there are carriers for whom the robocalls are a major slice of revenue. But are any of them nearly as big as the consumer-focused telecoms companies?
  - Rjevski 9y ago
    It’s not really been bought off by those exact carriers, but by the telco industry as a whole. The industry is honestly shady as fuck. They’re being pushed into irrelevance by the internet and VoIP (where there’s no such thing as paying for minutes, thankfully), have thousands of employees to pay (despite not doing much, as they became irrelevant over time), and so while incoming call revenue is maybe 1% of total revenue for someone like T-Mobile, it’s still paying for some useless people’s pay checks, so of course those are gonna fight back. Now aggregate that across the entire industry - everyone fighting for their 1% of total revenue - and you’ve still got a strong pushback. Finally your carrier knows they’re not going to loose your 100$/month over robocalls because you have nowhere to go. The situation might change if one carrier bites the bullet and implements a working solution (but good luck given that it requires industry-wide cooperation), then the other carriers will wake up as they now know customers actually have a competitor to go to.

lioeters 9y ago

Regulatory capture ("corruption and legalized bribery" in other words) is the critical point that should be raised in every discussion regarding FCC. Without addressing this formative power dynamic, there can be no meaningful progress.

kevin_b_er 9y ago

This is because Ajit Pai, along with his party, value corporate profit above service to the public.

vertexFarm 9y ago

Damn, good point. I figured this should be an easily solvable problem. Stands to reason that the FCC is just letting it happen because they're hilariously corrupt. Definitely one of the most successfully captured regulatory bodies.